Search

The information provided at the time of diagnosis of Non Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer (NMIBC) is highly variable. Well-informed patient are more involved in shared decisions. The objective of our study was to assess the information perceived by the patient at the time of NMIBC diagnosis and its impact on quality of life.The VICAN french cohort involved a representative sample of 4174 cancer patients and 5 years survivors. Patients reported outcomes (PROs) were collected by phone and self-questionnaire. Among the 118 NMIBC patients, the term used to define the pathology at diagnosis was prospectively evaluated. The impact on quality of life (using SF-12, EORTC-QLQ-C30 and HAD scale) and on adherence to the care protocol (endoscopic monitoring) has been assessed.Only 26.8% of patients reported hearing the word « Cancer » at the time of NMIBC diagnosis. Conversely, 73.2% of them reported others terms, including « Tumor » (22%), « Polyp » (24%), and « Carcinoma » (17.1%). There was no difference in terms of physical, mental quality of life and anxiety, regardless of the term used. Adherence to the follow-up endoscopic protocol was better in the group of patients hearing the word "Cancer".Three quarters of patients treated for NMIBC did not integrate the concept of « Cancer » at the time of diagnosis. Quality of life and anxiety did not differ significantly depending on the term used at diagnosis. However, adherence to care protocol appears to be higher when using the word "Cancer".3.

Chronic pain is one major determinant of quality of life among cancer survivors. It is especially true for breast cancer survivors, who frequently endure iatrogenic pain. We conducted in-depth interviews with 25 women recruited in the ELIPPSE cohort, 24 months after their diagnosis, and several months after the end of their treatment. These women gave various meanings to chronic pain (a transient condition, necessary for recovering, or a new and permanent condition) that contribute to 'normalize' pain and to prevent its alleviation. Moreover, health professional sometimes fuel this 'normalization' of pain. Our interviews also showed how participants enduring chronic pain tried to relieve it by adjusting their daily activities and gestures. Finally, our results emphasize both the lack of information given to patients concerning iatrogenic pain and the existing ways to manage it, and the lack of specific training for health professionals.

This study aimed to examine factors associated with the prescription of opioid analgesics to terminal cancer patients, including physicians' general attitudes toward morphine and contextual factors.A survey was conducted among a sample of French general practitioners (GPs) and oncologists. Respondents were asked to describe the last three terminally ill patients they had followed up to death.Overall, 526 GPs and oncologists (global response rate: 57%) described 1,082 cancer patients, among whom 85.4% received opioid analgesics. Among other significant predictors (patient age, cancer type, family assistance), this prescription was less frequent for female patients followed by male physicians (OR = 0.53), and more frequent for patients followed by physicians trained in palliative care (OR = 2.70). On the other hand, physicians' attitudes toward morphine were not associated with prescription of morphine and other opioid analgesics.Although nonprescription of opioid analgesics is only a crude proxy measure for undertreatment of cancer pain, our findings suggest the need to develop training in palliative care in order to standardize practices among GPs and specialists. Our results also highlight the necessity to study pain assessment as an interaction between the physician and the patient, and to consider patients' and physicians' respective genders as a key variable within this interaction.

Despite the introduction of HAART, pain is still a common symptom in people living with HIV/AIDS. For these persons, pain management supplied by palliative care teams may support standard HIV care. This study compares opinions toward palliative care of 83 HIV specialists and 217 oncologists (French national survey: Palliative Care 2002). Data were collected by phone questionnaire. A cluster analysis was carried out in order to identify contrasted profiles of opinions toward palliative care. A logistic regression was performed to test the relationships between identified clusters and physicians' characteristics. With a two-cluster partition, we observed a profile corresponding to a restrictive conception of palliative care. Within this profile, physicians were more prone to consider that palliative care should be used only for terminally-ill patients, and only after all curative treatments have failed, with a restrained prescriptive power for physicians providing palliative care. This conception was associated with reluctance toward morphine analgesia. Once controlled for other physicians' characteristics, HIV specialists were more likely than oncologists to endorse this restrictive conception (OR=1.9, CI 95% [1.1; 3.3]). Thus French HIV specialists should be more informed about the utility of providing palliative care, even for patients who are not in terminal stage.

The aim of this survey, which was part of an English-French project supported by the Commission of the European Communities, was to compare access to HIV post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) in the occupational and non-occupational contexts in 27 European countries. A protocol was designed in May 1998 in collaboration with all country consultants. Data were collected at country level by each consultant through interviews, review of local and national recommendations and results of national or local surveys. The final comparative analysis was carried out from the individual country reports and a review of the literature. The large majority of European countries have detailed procedures regarding occupational PEP: 20/27 have produced national guidelines, three have adopted the US CDC recommendations and only four have no official recommendations. Although no standard protocol exists, the more common one is a four-week implementation of a triple combination therapy. In the context of non-occupational exposure to HIV, only five countries have guidelines with specific recommendations and one country has adopted the CDC recommendations. In the majority of cases (13 countries), PEP is never recommended but is only available in a few circumstances, sometimes with major limitations. In the last eight countries, such PEP is not currently available. Although the estimations of HIV transmission risks in occupational and non-occupational contexts are really comparables, easy access to PEP after accidental sexual or blood exposures is not guaranteed for the general population in the majority of European countries.